Did God Answer That Prayer?

In his recent book Petitionary Prayer, Scott Davison presents an epistemological challenge to petitionary prayer. He asks: If S prays for God to bring about event E, and E in fact occurs, how could one be justified in believing that E was an answer to S’s prayer? Apart from direct revelation in which God explicitly provides reasons for believing that E was an answer to prayer, Davison argues, S could not know that S’s prayer had been answered by God. Thus, the person praying should remain agnostic about answered prayers. I argue that in failing to attend to two theological resources available in the Christian tradition—the concept of spiritual senses and teachings about the relational nature of prayer—Davison’s conclusion is premature. Drawing upon recent literature on the epistemology of perception and the theology of prayer, I argue that one can be confident that God has answered one’s prayers.

The Influence Aim Problem of Petitionary Prayer: A Cosmic Conflict Approach

This article addresses the problem of whether petitionary prayer, aimed at influencing God, is consistent with the traditional Christian affirmations of divine omniscience, omnipotence, and omnibenevolence. In this article, I first briefly articulate the problem of petitionary prayer, then briefly introduce and discuss some common approaches to resolving the problem. Finally, I introduce and discuss some implications of retrieving a cosmic conflict approach with rules of engagement as a possible avenue that warrants further consideration relative to the problem of petitionary prayer.

How Puzzles of Petitionary Prayer Solve Themselves: Divine Omnirationality, Interest-Relative Explanation, and Answered Prayer

Some have seen in the divine attribute of omnirationality, identified by Alexander R. Pruss, the promise of a dissolution of the usual puzzles of petitionary prayer. Scott Davison has challenged this line of thought with a series of example cases. I will argue that Davison is only partially correct, and that the reasons for this reveal an important new way to approach the puzzles of petitionary prayer. Because explanations are typically interest-relative, there is not one correct account of “answered prayer” but many, corresponding to a variety of reasons to care whether God might answer our prayers. It follows from this that the omnirationality solution can be vindicated and that puzzles of petitionary prayer that are not dissolved thereby will typically contain within themselves the seeds of their own solutions.

Prayer and Providence

The nature and role of prayer in Christian life have long been items of discussion, and (like the problem of pain and suffering) they admit no easy, formulaic answers. This chapter engages Lewis’s extensive writings on prayer in general as well as the different aspects of prayer, such as praise and confession. With characteristic frankness, Lewis also tackles the difficult problem of petitionary prayer—including the perplexity created by two New Testament models of prayer—petitions on the condition that they are God’s will and petitions in faith that they will be granted. Acknowledging that he does not have the faith that assures an answer (and observing that almost no Christians really seem to have that kind of faith either), Lewis says that the Christian must engage in the first type of prayer. Lewis also discusses the role of prayer in a relational universe in which a relational God seeks relationship with us—partly to make the point that prayer is not just petition and partly to make the point that relationship with God in prayer helps transform us. Another topic regarding Lewis and prayer is the nature of divine providence if God is timeless and knows timelessly what needs to occur—why pray?

Disappointment in God and Relational Spirituality: Moderator Effects for Meditative Prayer

In recent years, there have been a number of studies exploring the positive and negative aspects of spirituality. While many studies have indicated spirituality has a generally positive influence in persons’ lives, people also experience negative effects associated with spiritual struggles. Studies have also suggested that spiritual practices such as prayer have the potential to mitigate the difficult and distressing aspects of spirituality. In this study, we explore the role of prayer in the relationship between disappointment in God and relational spirituality (i.e. how one relates to what they perceive to be sacred). Our results indicated that meditative prayer has a moderating effect, such that the negative relationship between disappointment in God and relational spirituality outcomes became less significant as subjects engaged in more frequent meditative prayer. Significant effects were not found for colloquial prayer or petitionary prayer.

Changing God’s Mind

Summary Since God is perfect, he should never have a reason for changing his mind. However, some biblical passages describe God as modifying his chosen course of action in response to prayer. How could human prayers ever be efficacious if God’s mind is always independently set on doing what is best? This article examines contemporary attempts to answer the question by emphasizing the benefits of prayer for the petitioner. After exposing some difficulties with this solution, the author proposes that one can overcome the problem of petitionary prayer by reflecting on the relationship God wishes to develop with his human creatures. From this vantage point, one can see that God’s willingness to change his mind in response to prayer proceeds from his free decision to accept his human creatures’ input as he partners with them to realize his plan for the world.

Participation in Providence: Robert W. Jenson’s Theology of Prayer

This paper explores Robert W. Jenson’s theology of prayer as he articulated it over the course of a long, productive career. In the end, the paper critiques aspects of Jenson’s theology of providence, and an alternative account of petitionary prayer is offered.